Difference between the vikings and a playoff team...

[Orion]

Watching the Falcons/49ers game at the end 49ers blitzed the falcons, forced an interception returned for a touchdown and sealed the win. there's a difference right there, I can't recall seeing the vikings blitzing the browns, bears, cowboys, etc on the last drive at such a crucial moment. On the other hand, any time we played a super bowl contender (panthers, seahawks, bengals) we got blown out.

[PurpleHalo]

The Vikings just fold into a prevent (you from winning) shell late in games.

[Demi]

It'd probably help if we had even half the talent that the 49ers have on defense...

[thatguy]

Heaven forbid that Matt Ryan just made a really poor decision to throw on a 2-yard quick slant when the corners had inside position...they didn't have to blitz for that to happen. Had Frazier been running the offense on that drive and decided to not run it in that situation, I'm sure people would be freaking out about that too. That was a bad playcall and even worse execution overall.

The 49ers are obviously a much better team than the Vikings but that drive didn't prove much to me in terms of a "difference between the Vikings and a playoff team."

[Eli]

Watching the Falcons/49ers game at the end 49ers blitzed the falcons, forced an interception returned for a touchdown and sealed the win.

Forced? Seemed like at least partly a lucky bounce of the ball to me.

there's a difference right there, I can't recall seeing the vikings blitzing the browns, bears, cowboys, etc on the last drive at such a crucial moment. On the other hand, any time we played a super bowl contender (panthers, seahawks, bengals) we got blown out.

The Vikings have limited talent at both linebacker and in the secondary, which is a deadly combination when trying to blitz. The linebackers are a bit slow (although Cole showed us surprising quickness when blitzing) and easily picked up by blockers, and the secondary is left badly exposed when there are one or two less of them covering receivers.

There's also the effectiveness of the rush from the defensive line. If you have two or even one guy on the line who commands a double-team, then blitzes can be infinitely more effective. Unfortunately, the Vikings have nobody on the DL who can't be blocked by a single lineman.

[Mothman]

Watching the Falcons/49ers game at the end 49ers blitzed the falcons, forced an interception returned for a touchdown and sealed the win. there's a difference right there, I can't recall seeing the vikings blitzing the browns, bears, cowboys, etc on the last drive at such a crucial moment.

I don't know if they did it in all those games but they did it in some of them. They lost anyway.

The Vikings just fold into a prevent (you from winning) shell late in games.

No, they don't, but people clearly make that assumption.

[allday1991]

It'd probably help if we had even half the talent that the 49ers have on defense...

the truth.

[Funkytown]

Forced? Seemed like at least partly a lucky bounce of the ball to me.

You beat me to it!

For me, that play just pretty much summed up the entire Falcons season! Especially after that awesome onside kick recovery? Ugh. The pick was more of a bad play by the Falcons than a good play by the Niners. Bad plays and poor execution sum up our season, too.

[chicagopurple]

THe biggest difference......Having players/Talent!!

The ONLY position on the field (OR sideline) where the Vikes actually can remotely claim to have an edge with the Niners is RB. AP is the ONLY player on our team that would be an upgrade for the Niners. Every other Viking would be a step down compared to the Niners. The same can be said for the Coaching Staff. We have the 3 Stooges for Coaches.

[Funkytown]

THe biggest difference......Having players/Talent!!

The ONLY position on the field (OR sideline) where the Vikes actually can remotely claim to have an edge with the Niners is RB. AP is the ONLY player on our team that would be an upgrade for the Niners. Every other Viking would be a step down compared to the Niners. The same can be said for the Coaching Staff. We have the 3 Stooges for Coaches.

I tried to disagree with you, but then I couldn't...

Can we count special teams? If so, I have a couple.

[losperros]

It'd probably help if we had even half the talent that the 49ers have on defense...

And that's the name of that tune!

[Webbfann]

Do you honestly think we could win with the 3 stooges even if we had the talent you guys think we lack?

[Mothman]

Do you honestly think we could win with the 3 stooges even if we had the talent you guys think we lack?

Yes. I have no idea if they could win a Super Bowl but I think Frazier and his staff would be capable of leading a team with, say, SF's talent to the playoffs each year. I thought they did a pretty impressive job just leading the Vikes into the playoffs last season.

[Webbfann]

Yes. I have no idea if they could win a Super Bowl but I think Frazier and his staff would be capable of leading a team with, say, SF's talent to the playoffs each year. I thought they did a pretty impressive job just leading the Vikes into the playoffs last season.

Well I know YOU think that, lol.

[Mothman]

Well I know YOU think that, lol.

I'm glad you're amused. Now the question is: why don't you think the Vikes could win with better talent and the same coaching staff? After all, they won 10 games last year and reached the playoffs. They were close to winning quite a few more games this season and if I'm not mistaken, you've already stated that you believe they would have won more games if they'd started Cassel all year. If you believe that, it implies that you think talent makes some difference so when you take the closes losses and a winning record last season into consideration, doesn't it seem likely that upgrading the talent could lead to another winning record and a return to the postseason, even with the same coaching staff? If not then, logically, why not?